today I tried to use Hammer CLI for "baby steps". I mean for configuring
clean Foreman installation for the first time. Due to some bugs, I was
unable to go through it.
I would like to propose if Tomas/Martin could test the CLI against this
simple success story and tell us when this is done. I'd like to start
using CLI ASAP for that because I am configuring clean Foreman
installation every week or something. It's too much clicking.
The goal would be to get to the point when user is able to create bare
metal hosts. If libvirt compute resource can be created too, then
Foreman can be scripted to quite nice level when developers can
immediately start spawning hosts via libvirt or bare metal.
Please help me to determine success story for CLI. So far I have
identified this:
create smart proxy *
create architecture
create new subnet
import existing subnet from a proxy
create new domain
associate domain with proxy
associate subnet with domain
associate subnet with proxy (DHCP, TFTP, DNS)
create new partition table
create new OS
create new template
edit existing pre-defined template
associate applicable OS with pre-defined template **
associate OS with architecture
associate OS with part table
associate OS with install media
associate OS with install provision and pxelinux templates
create libvirt compute resource
create puppet environment
and finally create a bare metal host entry
I know we have installer for that now, but having that would allow
us to automate developer installations.
** - At least both provision (Kickstart) and PXELinux templates
I hope the list is complete, I just tested this.
The whole point of this list is to change from more or less random CLI
commands implementation to user story that can improve our workflows. It
is also good starting point for users and QA.
Thanks for this valuable feedback and nice sum up of the front-line
commands.
I agree that to have this working is essential.
I'll go through the individual steps and file bugs to track the issues I
found.
Hopefully that won't be many and it will be fixed soon.
I'll keep you informed about the progress,
Martin
···
On 10/16/2013 04:20 PM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> Hello,
>
> today I tried to use Hammer CLI for "baby steps". I mean for configuring
> clean Foreman installation for the first time. Due to some bugs, I was
> unable to go through it.
>
> I would like to propose if Tomas/Martin could test the CLI against this
> simple success story and tell us when this is done. I'd like to start
> using CLI ASAP for that because I am configuring clean Foreman
> installation every week or something. It's too much clicking.
>
> The goal would be to get to the point when user is able to create bare
> metal hosts. If libvirt compute resource can be created too, then
> Foreman can be scripted to quite nice level when developers can
> immediately start spawning hosts via libvirt or bare metal.
>
> Please help me to determine success story for CLI. So far I have
> identified this:
>
> - create smart proxy *
> - create architecture
> - create new subnet
> - import existing subnet from a proxy
> - create new domain
> - associate domain with proxy
> - associate subnet with domain
> - associate subnet with proxy (DHCP, TFTP, DNS)
> - create new partition table
> - create new OS
> - create new template
> - edit existing pre-defined template
> - associate applicable OS with pre-defined template **
> - associate OS with architecture
> - associate OS with part table
> - associate OS with install media
> - associate OS with install provision and pxelinux templates
> - create libvirt compute resource
> - create puppet environment
> - and finally create a bare metal host entry
>
> * - I know we have installer for that now, but having that would allow
> us to automate developer installations.
>
> ** - At least both provision (Kickstart) and PXELinux templates
>
> I hope the list is complete, I just tested this.
>
> The whole point of this list is to change from more or less random CLI
> commands implementation to user story that can improve our workflows. It
> is also good starting point for users and QA.
>
This [1] is the bug I created for tracking of progress. To every step
mentioned above I've added hammer command if it worked or links to
related bugs.
All went relatively smooth with just a few issues. Major missing things
are puppet class import and more solid host creation. The host command
is a priority right now and Tomas is working hard on that.
There was a few bugs fixed since 1.3 release so if you want to
experiment with latest hammer there is nice gem command extension for this:
···
On 10/16/2013 04:39 PM, Martin Bačovský wrote:
> On 10/16/2013 04:20 PM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> today I tried to use Hammer CLI for "baby steps". I mean for configuring
>> clean Foreman installation for the first time. Due to some bugs, I was
>> unable to go through it.
>>
>> I would like to propose if Tomas/Martin could test the CLI against this
>> simple success story and tell us when this is done. I'd like to start
>> using CLI ASAP for that because I am configuring clean Foreman
>> installation every week or something. It's too much clicking.
>>
>> The goal would be to get to the point when user is able to create bare
>> metal hosts. If libvirt compute resource can be created too, then
>> Foreman can be scripted to quite nice level when developers can
>> immediately start spawning hosts via libvirt or bare metal.
>>
>> Please help me to determine success story for CLI. So far I have
>> identified this:
>>
>> - create smart proxy *
>> - create architecture
>> - create new subnet
>> - import existing subnet from a proxy
>> - create new domain
>> - associate domain with proxy
>> - associate subnet with domain
>> - associate subnet with proxy (DHCP, TFTP, DNS)
>> - create new partition table
>> - create new OS
>> - create new template
>> - edit existing pre-defined template
>> - associate applicable OS with pre-defined template **
>> - associate OS with architecture
>> - associate OS with part table
>> - associate OS with install media
>> - associate OS with install provision and pxelinux templates
>> - create libvirt compute resource
>> - create puppet environment
>> - and finally create a bare metal host entry
>>
>> * - I know we have installer for that now, but having that would allow
>> us to automate developer installations.
>>
>> ** - At least both provision (Kickstart) and PXELinux templates
>>
>> I hope the list is complete, I just tested this.
>>
>> The whole point of this list is to change from more or less random CLI
>> commands implementation to user story that can improve our workflows. It
>> is also good starting point for users and QA.
>>
> Thanks for this valuable feedback and nice sum up of the front-line
> commands.
> I agree that to have this working is essential.
> I'll go through the individual steps and file bugs to track the issues
> I found.
> Hopefully that won't be many and it will be fixed soon.
> I'll keep you informed about the progress,
>
> Martin
···
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 04:29:39PM +0200, Martin Bačovský wrote:
> This [1] is the bug I created for tracking of progress. To every
> step mentioned above I've added hammer command if it worked or links
> to related bugs.
> All went relatively smooth with just a few issues. Major missing
> things are puppet class import and more solid host creation. The
> host command is a priority right now and Tomas is working hard on
> that.
>
> There was a few bugs fixed since 1.3 release so if you want to
> experiment with latest hammer there is nice gem command extension
> for this:
>
> gem install specific_install
> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli"
> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli-foreman"
>
> I'll keep the bug updated so keep watching,
···
On 10/21/2013 08:39 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 04:29:39PM +0200, Martin Bačovský wrote:
>> This [1] is the bug I created for tracking of progress. To every
>> step mentioned above I've added hammer command if it worked or links
>> to related bugs.
>> All went relatively smooth with just a few issues. Major missing
>> things are puppet class import and more solid host creation. The
>> host command is a priority right now and Tomas is working hard on
>> that.
>>
>> There was a few bugs fixed since 1.3 release so if you want to
>> experiment with latest hammer there is nice gem command extension
>> for this:
>>
>> gem install specific_install
>> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli"
>> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli-foreman"
>>
>> I'll keep the bug updated so keep watching,
>
> Great job, guys.
>
> I will give it a try this week and report issues.
>
> LZ
>
> From: "Bryan Kearney" <bryan.kearney@gmail.com>
> To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 9:06:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Success story for CLI
>
> >> This [1] is the bug I created for tracking of progress. To every
> >> step mentioned above I've added hammer command if it worked or links
> >> to related bugs.
> >> All went relatively smooth with just a few issues. Major missing
> >> things are puppet class import and more solid host creation. The
> >> host command is a priority right now and Tomas is working hard on
> >> that.
> >>
> >> There was a few bugs fixed since 1.3 release so if you want to
> >> experiment with latest hammer there is nice gem command extension
> >> for this:
> >>
> >> gem install specific_install
> >> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli"
> >> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli-foreman"
> >>
> >> I'll keep the bug updated so keep watching,
> >
> > Great job, guys.
> >
> > I will give it a try this week and report issues.
> >
> > LZ
> >
> Any chance of getting this into a CI job?
We have CI for hammer and the foreman plugin [1]. It might also make sense to use bats [2] for testing the CLI in a more "end-userish" way.
>
>> From: "Bryan Kearney" <bryan.kearney@gmail.com>
>> To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 9:06:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Success story for CLI
>>
>>>> This [1] is the bug I created for tracking of progress. To every
>>>> step mentioned above I've added hammer command if it worked or links
>>>> to related bugs.
>>>> All went relatively smooth with just a few issues. Major missing
>>>> things are puppet class import and more solid host creation. The
>>>> host command is a priority right now and Tomas is working hard on
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> There was a few bugs fixed since 1.3 release so if you want to
>>>> experiment with latest hammer there is nice gem command extension
>>>> for this:
>>>>
>>>> gem install specific_install
>>>> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli"
>>>> gem specific_install -l "theforeman/hammer-cli-foreman"
>>>>
>>>> I'll keep the bug updated so keep watching,
>>> Great job, guys.
>>>
>>> I will give it a try this week and report issues.
>>>
>>> LZ
>>>
>> Any chance of getting this into a CI job?
> We have CI for hammer and the foreman plugin [1]. It might also make sense to use bats [2] for testing the CLI in a more "end-userish" way.
>
> -Sam
>
> 1. http://ci.theforeman.org/view/Hammer/
> 2. https://github.com/sstephenson/bats
We were thinking about adding set of end-to-end tests similar to what
katello-cli has. Bat sounds like a good candidate for its
implementation. Thanks for the link.
Martin
···
On 10/22/2013 03:13 PM, Sam Kottler wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> On 10/21/2013 08:39 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 04:29:39PM +0200, Martin Bačovský wrote:
